Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3616 (MAD)

Kannammal v. Annapoorani

2014-09-24

S.VIMALA

body2014
Judgment 1. The petitioners herein are tenants. The respondent herein is the landlord. 2. The landlord/respondent herein filed R.C.O.P.No.24 of 2007 seeking eviction of the tenant, namely, Kannammal, on the ground of willful default in payment of rent. The petition was allowed and the tenant was directed to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the property to the landlord within two months. 3. Challenging the said order, the tenant, namely, Kannammal, filed RCA along with an application to condone the delay of 235 days in representation. During the pendency of RCA, Kannammal died and her legal representatives have been brought on record. The Appellate Court dismissed the petition to condone the delay in representation. 4. Challenging the dismissal order, the legal heirs of Kannammal have filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the tenant has not deposited the rent into the Court, therefore, without depositing the rent into the Court, they are not entitled to prosecute the Civil Revision Petition. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners pointed out that the relationship between the parties as landlord and tenant itself is under dispute and therefore, there is no question as to the payment of rent. 7. The learned Rent Controller, by passing the order of eviction on the ground of willful default in the payment of rent, has given a finding that the revision petitioner herein should be treated as a tenant. Without prejudice to the contentions raised, the tenant is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/-, towards arrears of rent, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to the credit of R.C.O.P.No.24 of 2007 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-District Munsif of Pollachi, along with an undertaking affidavit that he would pay the remaining amount, if so, ordered by the Court. Subject to the result of R.C.A., if the results so warrants, the tenant shall make further payment of rent. 8. So far as the petition to condone the delay in representation is concerned, the Courts are normally liberal in condoning the delay in representation. It would be relevant to point out that the delay is not in filing, but in representation. 9. Considering the circumstances, the Appellate Court itself should have allowed the petition. 8. So far as the petition to condone the delay in representation is concerned, the Courts are normally liberal in condoning the delay in representation. It would be relevant to point out that the delay is not in filing, but in representation. 9. Considering the circumstances, the Appellate Court itself should have allowed the petition. Therefore, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the delay of 235 days in representation is condoned. The learned Rent Control Appellate Authority is directed to take the appeal on file, after condonation of delay and dispose of the appeal itself, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.